has been checked in the more patrician assembly. The encouragement of numbers, of ready sympathy, and of warm applause, are wanting; and the disheartened orator is fain to adapt his tone to the ungenial temperament of his audience. Thus to discourage public spirit, and devotion to the great affairs of state, cannot fail to diminish the political in fluence of the House of Lords. Their defer ers. The inertness of the House of Lords has produced an other result prejudicial to its due influence in public affairs. It has generally yielded, with an indo- ence to leadlent facility, to the domination of one or two of its own members, gifted with the strongest wills. Lord Thur. low, Lord Eldon, the Duke of Wellington, and Lord Lyndhurst, have swayed it, at different times, almost with the power of a dictator. Such men had acquired their activity and resolution in a different school from that of an hereditary chamber; and where peers by hereditary descent, like the Earl of Derby, have exercised an equal sway, they have learned how to lead and govern men, amidst the more stirring scenes of the House of Commons. Every assembly must have its leaders; but the absolute surrender of its own judgment to that of a single man, perhaps of narrow mind, and unworthy prejudices, cannot fail to impair its moral influence. - as the relations. Such, then, are the political position of the House of Lords, and the causes of its strength and weakThe peerage' ness, as a part of the legislature. The peerage in its social is also to be regarded in another aspect, head of the great community of the upper classes. It rep resents their interests, feelings, and aspirations. Instead of being separated from other ranks in dignified isolation, it is connected with them by all the ties of social life. It leads them in politics: in the magistracy: in local administration : in works of usefulness, and charity: in the hunting-field, the banquet, and the ballroom. The increase of the peerage has naturally extended the The aristocracy. social ramifications of the aristocracy. Six hundred fami lies ennobled, their children bearing titles of nobility,allied by descent or connection with the first county families, and with the wealthiest commoners of other classes, have struck their roots far and wide into the soil of English society. In every county their influence is great, in many, paramount. age. The untitled landed gentry, — upheld by the conservative The landed law of primogeniture, are an ancient aristocracy gentry. in themselves; and the main source from which the peerage has been recruited. In no other country is there such a class, - at once aristocratic and popular, and a bond of connection between the nobles and the commonalty. Many of these have been distinguished by hereditary The baronet- titles, inferior to nobility, and conferring no political privileges; yet highly prized as a social distinction. The baronetage, like the peerage, has been considerably increased during the last century. On the accession of George III., there were about five hundred baronets;1 in 1860, they had been increased to no less than eight hundred and sixty. During the sixty years of this reign, the extraordinary number of four hundred and ninetyfour baronetcies were created. Of these a large number have been conferred for political services; and by far the greater part are enjoyed by men of family and fortune. Still the taste for titles was difficult to satiate. Orders or knighthood. The ancient and honorable dignity of knighthood was conferred unsparingly by George III. upon little men for little services, until the title was wellnigh degraded. After the king's escape from assassination at the hands of Margaret Nicholson, so many knighthoods were 1 Betham's Baronetage. Gentl. Mag. lix. 398. 2 Viz., six hundred and seventy-four baronets of Great Britain, one hundred and eleven baronets of Scotland and Nova Scotia, and seventy-five of Ireland. 8 This number is from 1761 to 1821; from a paper prepared by the late Mr. Pulman, Clarencieux King-at-Arms. conferred on persons presenting congratulatory addresses to the Crown, that "a knight of Peg Nicholson's order" became a byword. The degradation of knighthood by the indiscriminate liberality of the Crown in granting it, continued until a recent time. Still there were not knighthoods enough; and in 1783 the king instituted the Order of St. Patrick. Scotland had its most ancient Order of the Thistle: but no order of knighthood had, until that time, been appropriated to Ireland. The Hanoverian Guelphic Order of Knighthood had also been opened to the ambition of Englishmen; and William IV., during his reign, added to its roll, a goodly company of English knights. The Order of the Bath, originally a military order, was enlarged in 1815; and again in 1847, the queen added a civil division to the order, to comprise such persons as by their personal services to the Crown, or by the performance of public duties, have merited the royal favor.1 the aristoc Besides these several titled orders, may be noticed officers enjoying naval and military rank, whose numbers Other classes were extraordinarily augmented by the long war siding with with France, and by the extension of the British racy. possessions abroad. Men holding high offices in the state, the church, the law, the universities, and other great incorporations, have also associated their powers and influence with those of the nobility. The continual growth and accumulation of property have been a source of increasing strength to the Brit- Wealth favorish nobles. Wealth is, in itself, an aristocracy. able to the aristocracy. It may desire to rival the nobility of a country, and even to detract from its glory. But in this land of old associations, it seeks only to enjoy the smiles and favors of the aristocracy, craves admission to its society, aspires to its connection, - and is ambitious of its dignities. The learned professions, commerce, manufactures, and public 1 Letters-Patent, 24th May, 1847; London Gazette; p 1951. employments have created an enormous body of persons or independent income; some connected with the landed gentry, others with the commercial classes. All these form part of the independent "gentry." They are spread over the fairest parts of the country; and noble cities have been built for their accommodation. Bath, Cheltenham, Leamington, and Brighton attest their numbers and their opulence.1 With much social influence and political weight, they form a strong outwork of the peerage, and uphold its ascendency by moral as well as political support. The professions lean, as a body, on the higher ranks of The profes- society. The Church is peculiarly connected with sions. the landed interest. Everywhere the clergy cleave to power; and the vast lay patronage vested in the proprietors of the soil, draws close the bond between them and the Church. The legal and medical professions, again, being mainly supported by wealthy patrons, have the same political and social interests. How vast a community of rank, wealth, and intelligence do these several classes of society constitute! The House of Lords, in truth, is not only a privileged body, but a great representative institution,-standing out as the embodiment of the aristocratic influence, and sympathies of the country. 1 Bath has been termed the "City of the Three-per-cent Consols." CHAPTER VI. The House of Commons: - Nomination Boroughs: -Various and limite. Rights of Election: - Bribery at Elections:- Sale of Seats: Government influence in large Towns: - Revenue Officers disfranchised: Vexatious Contests in Cities. - Representation of Scotland and Ireland. — Injustice in the Trial of Election Petitions. - Places and Pensions. Bribes to Members: Shares in Loans, Lotteries, and Contracts. Successive Schemes of Parliamentary Reform prior to 1830:- The Reform Bills of 1830-31, 1831, and 1831-32: Changes effected in the Representation, by the Reform Acts of 1832. - Bribery since 1832, and measures taken to restrain it. - Duration of Parliaments: - Vote by Ballot: - Property Qualification. — Later measures of Parliamentary Reform. Unfaithful House of its trust. IN preceding chapters, the various sources of political influence enjoyed by the Crown, and by the House', of Lords, have been traced out. Their united ness of the powers long maintained an ascendency in the Commons to councils and government of the state. But great as were their own inherent powers, the main support of that ascendency was found among the representatives of the people, in the House of Commons. If that body had truly represented the people, and had been faithful to its trust, i would have enjoyed an authority equal at least, if not superior, to that of the Crown and the House of Lords com bined. The theory of an equipoise in our legislature, however had been distorted in practice; and the House of Its dependCommons was at once dependent and corrupt. ence and cor ruption. The Crown, and the dominant political families who wielded its power, readily commanded a majority of that assembly. A large proportion of the borough members were |